Aggravated Burglary

Susan Hall: For each of the years 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019 how many instances of Aggravated Burglary were recorded in London, broken down by Borough?

The Mayor: Please see attached the requested data for the period specified. It should be noted that aggravated burglary has accounted for and continues to account for, under 1 per centof all burglary offences recorded by the MPS.

Restaurant crime

Susan Hall: For each of the years 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019 how many crimes were reported in or involving the following restaurants, broken down by crime type:
• McDonalds
• KFC

The Mayor: Please see attached the requested data for the period specified. It should be noted that the offences listed, relate to offences that have taken place either in or in proximity of the highlighted establishments.

Cuckooing

Keith Prince: What progress has the Met made to stop cuckooing?

The Mayor: The MPS has developed guidance for officers on how to deal with cuckooing. This includes guidance around the law, identifying vulnerable persons or venues, how Safer Neighbourhood Team Officers can assist by conducting regular visits, partnership working with other agencies, and obtaining a closure order when antisocial behaviour is associated with a premises.
The reporting of cuckooing has also been streamlined by the addition of a flag to Pre-Assessment Checks (PACs) which are created when police deal with vulnerable people, and a cuckooing flag can also be added on the Crime Report Information System (CRIS).

Electoral offences

Susan Hall: For each of the years 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019 how many electoral offences were reported to the Met, please breakdown by outcome, e.g. NFA, charge etc?

The Mayor: Please see attached the requested data for the period specified.

Stop and Search Effectiveness

Caroline Pidgeon: Recent analysis by The Times has indicated that there is no correlation between the increased use of stop and search and a reduction in knife crime. Despite some boroughs seeing a reduction in knife crime, some boroughs which have seen a huge increase is the use of section 60 orders including Enfield and Camden have reported a rise in knife crime in the past year. As such, do you think the way in which stop and search is used in London should be reviewed?

The Mayor: The use of Section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act (1994) is a preventative power, which is only deployed in circumstances where an officer reasonably believes that incidents involving serious violence may occur in a defined locality. Therefore, drawing conclusions about the number of incidents prevented through the use of a section 60 is challenging as they cannot be measured.
Knife crime offences overall have increased. However, knife crime with injury, which includes the more serious offences, has been decreasing across London. This includes Enfield and Camden which have seen decreases of 26.7 per centand 66.7 per centin January 2020 when compared to the same period in 2019.
It is clear from the Public Attitude Survey that the majority of Londoners support stop and search with 85 per centagreeing that ‘the police should conduct stop and search’.
Stop and search data is regularly scrutinised by my Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime and by Community Monitoring Groups to provide assurance that stop and search is conducted proportionately and professionally.

Greenyard 3

Steve O'Connell: For each of the years 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019, how much has been paid to Greenyard by the Met? Further to this, how much has been recuperated from the owners?

The Mayor: Paid to Greenyard
Recuperated from owners

Greenyard 4

Steve O'Connell: Has Greenyard put down any horses it has collected on behalf of the Met? If so, how many of each of the years 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019? Please breakdown by reason for putting them down.

The Mayor: Greenyard has put to sleep horses in the following years:
The full details or rationale for putting each horse to sleep is not recorded, but reasons would include: severe irreparable neurological damage; or when a horse’s health is so poor to the extent that full recovery is not possible and/or it would be unethical to keep them alive.

Greenyard 1

Steve O'Connell: For each of the years 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019, how many times have Greenyard collected horses on behalf of the Met?

The Mayor: Horses have been collected on the following occasions:

Greenyard 2

Steve O'Connell: Does Greenyard charge fees to the owners of horses that it has collected on behalf of the Met? If so, please can you provide a breakdown of the fees?

The Mayor: Once the horse(s) is/are rehomed or returned to the owner Greenyard determines the cost. These are broken-down as:

London Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls strategy (9)

Shaun Bailey: What progress has MOPAC made to fulfill their objectives within the London Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls strategy?

The Mayor: Substantial progress has been made by MOPAC to deliver the objectives within the London Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls strategy, working with statutory partners and the voluntary and community sector, across the areas of prevention, tackling perpetrators and providing support to victims. All commitments are underway and a significant number of them completed.

London Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls strategy (10)

Shaun Bailey: Since publication, what engagement have you had with victims of violence to assess the progress of the London Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls strategy?

The Mayor: I and my Office for Policing and Crime have multiple mechanisms for engaging with victims. Delivery of the London Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls strategy is a key function of the quarterly Violence Against Women and Girls Board, which has representation from the Voluntary and Community Sector, providing direct input from victims. Both my Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime and London’s Victim’s Commissioner engage with VCS providers who represent victims and survivors, we also hear from victims and survivors directly through visits to services and roundtable discussions. These mechanisms ensure that the voice of victims is heard and two-way channels of communication ensure key information and issues are fed back steering delivery of the strategy.

Police use of live facial recognition (1)

Siân Berry: What is the total cost of all deployments of live facial recognition by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) in London to date?
Could you provide this information in a table and include a breakdown of all costs needed and associated with its use, deployment and operation, such as (but not limited to) software, hardware, plain-clothed and uniformed officers and the cost of evaluation.

The Mayor: No specific budget has been set aside for the deployment of LFR, as such it is not possible to make an assessment of the costs of the trials or deployments to date which have drawn from existing core budgets and local resources. Approximately £240,000 has been spent on LFR software and hardware since 2016.

Special Ops

Keith Prince: Why can’t Basic Command Units use central Met funding for special ops?

The Mayor: BCUs can and do use central funding. Central funding in this context is funds for proactive operations which are administered by the MPS’ Coordination and Tasking Office (CATO).
There are a range of budget lines that are managed. It may sometimes not be possible to support an operation due to constraints on a particular budget line at a point in time during the financial year – when that is the case, funds will be directed at those bids which demonstrate the greatest risk of imminent harm, threat or risk.
In such circumstances, bids from anywhere in the MPS may be declined if they do not meet such criteria. An example might be funds being declined by one BCU for routine burglary patrols yet at the same time a bid for a neighbouring (or the same) BCU may be supported if it demonstrates the risk of violence/knife crime.

Special Ops 2

Keith Prince: Why don’t the Roads and Traffic Unit and Op Trident share details of operations with Basic Command Units?

The Mayor: The MPS has informed me that the RTPC does provide its Operations Calendar to the Co-ordination and Tasking Office (CATO) on a monthly basis, which contains the relevant details of its operations. All Safer Transport Team (STT) Inspectors, who have access to the Calendar attend BCU Tasking meetings every four weeks and feed this information to the boroughs. There are no operations that are withheld, and the RTPC shares as much information as possible.
Op Trident style operations cover a range of offending at different levels of criminality. This may be joint work with BCU’s to tackle gang crime at a street level (drug supply, knife violence, gun possession), through to tackling the most harmful organised crime networks in the UK and beyond. Unless it is a joint deployment already, sharing of details of any operation with local policing colleagues will be undertaken if it does not jeopardise the overall success of providing sustained public protection.

Babcock contract major change (1)

Andrew Dismore: What are LFB’s priorities for the major change process initiated on the Babcock training contract?

The Mayor: The focus of the Major Change Review is to deliver a new flexibility mechanism within the contract. This will deliver improved agility in meeting the organisation's training requirement, thereby ensuring that staff are trained in the risk-critical skills they need to do their jobs safely, confidently and well. The mechanism will include a revised pricing mechanism and a pre-agreed mechanism for demand overflow management.

Babcock contract major change (2)

Andrew Dismore: What is your reaction to HMI Matt Parr’s assessment of LFB’s Babcock contract as “expensive and inflexible”?

The Mayor: London Fire Brigade (LFB) has accepted the recommendations from the HMICFRS report and is working to respond to them. The contract with Babcock is in its eighth year of a 25-year contract and the working and commercial relationships need to adapt and respond to changes in LFB’s training requirement over this time. The demand currently placed on the training contract and associated budget is greater than it has ever been, and discussions have begun with Babcock to ensure that future provision is more flexible and responsive to LFB’s needs and wider operational developments and will deliver increased value for money.

Fire risk assessments for high rise buildings (2)

Andrew Dismore: In high rise buildings where stay put is suspended due to ACM cladding, how many of those premises’ fire risk assessments have been reviewed and found high priority actions for change?

The Mayor: London Fire Brigade’s Fire Safety Inspecting Officers have carried out Fire Safety Audits of 115 high rise residential premises in London that have aluminium composite material type cladding, and where stay put has been suspended. As part of those audits a review of the fire risk assessment is carried out. Data on the content of the risk assessment isn’t collected but where deficiencies are found, these will trigger enforcement action.

‘Checkpoint’ Programme – Durham Police

Navin Shah: The Durham Constabulary has set up a pioneering programme for repeat offenders. Trial results of the programme show that the reoffending rate for those who complete Checkpoint is 16 per cent less than those who were dealt with by other traditional criminal justice methods. Is this something for Met Police to consider?

The Mayor: Yes, the Met are currently trailling a deferred prosecution pilot in North West London (Barnet, Brent and Harrow). This is part of the Ministry of Justice’s ‘Chance to Change programme’ that was set up following the Lammy Review, and is informed by the evaluation of Durham’s Checkpoint pilot as well as the Operation Turning pilot which was delivered in West Midlands.
In the Met’s pilot where a person is accused of committing a low level crime, instead of being prosecuted, they are given an opportunity to complete specified conditions (e.g. rehabilitative work, victim reparation and/or a curfew). The offender is not required to admit guilt.

Extra places for incident command training (5)

Andrew Dismore: What consideration has LFB given to using its apprenticeship levy funds to run incident commander training?

The Mayor: The surplus from the London Fire Brigade (LFB) apprenticeship levy is used to support all LFB training. It forms part of the existing training contract budget and is already helping to fund LFB’s incident command training.

Gatwick Airport (1)

Navin Shah: Do you still believe that Gatwick is the cheapest, greenest and most viable expansion option presented by the Airports Commission? Please give your reasons.

The Mayor: The reports published by Government in October 2017 as part of its updated consultation on its Airports National Policy Statement set out that a second runway at Gatwick would be cheaper, delivered more quickly, have fewer environmental impacts and offer greater benefits to passengers and to the wider economy compared to a third runway at Heathrow.
Gatwick plans to launch its statutory Development Consent Order consultation in the Spring and I will be looking to the airport to robustly demonstrate how it will address all of its environmental and surface access impacts.
Expansion at Gatwick, like any UK airport, will need to stay within the carbon limits set by the Committee on Climate Change, to ensure the sector does not jeopardise the UK meeting its net zero 2050 carbon targets. This should include emissions from international flights.

Mass evacuation preparation (1)

Andrew Dismore: What training have LFB staff had since the Grenfell Tower fire to conduct a mass evacuation in a building that should be under stay put principles?

The Mayor: All watches were required to complete the training package associated with the ‘Operational News 37’ newsletter, which dealt with PN633 High Rise Firefighting and Fire Survival Guidance (FSG) in buildings that are failing. The majority of senior officers attended a one-day training session in December 2019/January 2020 specifically around the high rise policy, recognising signs and symptoms of building failure and identifying tools to implement a mass rescue and emergency evacuation in failing buildings. The Incident Command Team has conducted a series of 19 exercises while developing the new FSG policy, which is relevant to evacuation strategy.

Gatwick Airport (2)

Navin Shah: You have said that if the Government chooses to pursue a third runway at Heathrow, you would continue to call for a new runway at Gatwick as a more viable, cheaper and easier to build alternative. Is this still your view or do you believe that a new runway in the South East is no longer necessary?

The Mayor: The recent landmark Heathrow judgment is a victory for Londoners and future generations. We face a climate emergency and I’m delighted that the Court of Appeal has recognised that the Government cannot ignoreits climate change responsibilities.
Every sector must play its part in demonstrating how it will help us meet the net zero carbon target for 2050 and aviation is no exception.
This is not helped by a policy vacuum from Government which has so far failed to set out how its aviation policy can be made consistent with its climate change policy.
The evidence indicates that Heathrow expansion, given its scale and the proposal that growth should not be capped, will necessarily have a material impact on the ability of the UK to stay within carbon targets and budgets.
But I am clear that every airport has an obligation to take seriously its responsibilities for carbon reduction and I will scrutinise development proposals, including any from Gatwick, as and when they are brought forward.

Women Offences

Susan Hall: What is the total number of offences against women each year since 2015? Please provide a breakdown of the type of crime.

The Mayor: Please see attached the requested data for the period specified.

Body worn video footage procedure

Unmesh Desai: Please can you advise how often an individual Met officer equipped with body worn video equipment has their body worn video footage reviewed as part of their training and development?

The Mayor: The system that the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) use to manage Body Worn Video (BWV) is not able to provide specific data as to how many times a supervisor reviews an individual’s BWV.
However, footage is used as a valuable tool for supervisors in support of reflective practice and areas for development, as well as in the case of misconduct or performance procedures.
Furthermore, unless subject to Post Incident Procedure, BWV footage can be usefully used as a part of both individual and team de-briefing.
All supervisors are encouraged to regularly review BWV footage to support the development of their staff. Officers themselves will also use their own BWV footage to inform personal development. Wider organisational learning is fed into corporate training interventions.

Drones

Susan Hall: Please can you provide the number of drones owned by the Met broken down by make and model?

The Mayor: The MPS owns 33 drones, though not all of these are used operationally. For security reasons, the MPS will not disclose the makes or models of the drones it uses.

Police Response Times

Susan Hall: Can you please provide details of the average police response times in Barnet, Brent and Harrow in 2019?

The Mayor: The table below shows the average response time for Immediate ‘I’ calls in Barnet, Brent and Harrow for 2019.
Average I Calls Response times
Boroughs
Barnet
Brent
Harrow
2019
00:11:39
00:13:46
00:13:32
Note that the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) own target is to answer 90 per centof I calls within 15mins.

The Met’s Use of Facial Recognition (6)

Caroline Pidgeon: Do you share the concerns outlined by numerous academics in recent reports and publications that Facial Recognition Technology discriminates against certain groups including ethnic minorities, trans people and young people? If this is the case how can you justify this being used on London’s streets?

The Mayor: The London Policing Ethics Panel explored the issue of bias in their report, and the MPS response to the report which I received earlier this year sets out their activity in relation to this (https://www.london.gov.uk/mopac-publications/letter-mps-ac-operations). The Equality Impact Assessment produced by the MPS also covers the issue of bias (https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/facial-recognition/live-facial-recognition/). The technical evaluation, also at the above link, does not support the view that the technology discriminates against ethnic minorities, trans people and young people

Crime at London City Hall

Susan Hall: For each of the years 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019, how many crimes have been recorded as being committed at London City Hall, broken down by crime type?

The Mayor: It is not possible to supply data in relation to crimes being committed at City Hall. This is due to the address being used by MPS officers for both offences being committed within the building, and in proximity to City Hall. It would therefore be misleading to publish figures that simply contain London City Hall as an offence location.

Windows 7 4

Susan Hall: How many machines use Windows 7 in LFB?

The Mayor: For the purposes of security, we are unable to answer this question. We can, however, arrange a briefing for the Assembly Member with the Chief Information Officer.

Facial recognition technology 2

Tony Devenish: Will humans always have the final say when someone is identified by the Met's facial recognition technology?

The Mayor: Yes. The standard operating procedure is very clear that LFR simply flags a possible match. No intervention takes place until verified by a human operator/police officer.

Facial recognition technology

Tony Devenish: Are you convinced of the crime fighting benefits of the Met's facial recognition technology?

The Mayor: I support the Commissioner in exploiting new technologies which may be of benefit in driving down violent crime and other serious offending. Her professional judgement is that it is of more than a marginal benefit over existing tactics to identify wanted or high-risk missing people. As LFR is deployed the MPS will be making public the results of the deployments allowing scrutiny of its efficacy and MOPAC will be overseeing its use through the existing oversight mechanisms.

The HMICFRS Report Divergence Under Pressure

Peter Whittle: I note the report Divergence Under Pressure issued by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) on 7 February 2020, which stated that the public is increasingly not bothering to report certain types of crime. Is this development placing the relationship between the police and the public in jeopardy?
https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmicfrs/news/news-feed/noticeable-differences-between-police-and-the-service-they-provide/

The Mayor: Policing across England and Wales has faced an unprecedented reduction in funding alongside an increase in demand. HM Inspector of Constabulary and HM Inspector of Fire & Rescue Services Matt Parr has said in the press that “..police capacity to investigate crime has been reduced as a result of these pressures, which undoubtably has an impact on public confidence”.
There can be no doubt that a reduction in people and resources has had an impact on the MPS’s capacity to do its work and an impact on the relationship between the public and the police. Every day, MPS leaders must make difficult decisions about allocating diminishing resources across all of the serious issues that the police must deal with. The Government’s belated recognition that their police cuts were a mistake, finally beginning the recruitment of more officers is welcome, but this comes after nearly a decade of devastating cuts.

Roads & Transport Policing Officers

Unmesh Desai: Please can you advise of the total number of roads and transport policing officers in the following years: 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019? Please also provide this data by borough if possible.

The Mayor: Please see the table below for police officer strength within the Roads & Transport Policing OCU.
Date strength taken from
Officer Strength
31/12/2019
1,514
31/12/2018
1,468
31/12/2017
1,512
31/12/2016
1,610
31/12/2015
1,602
Data by borough is not available.

Government bodies and live facial recognition (1)

Siân Berry: Could the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) provide a response detailing how they have complied with the advice, recommendations, and guidance given in each of the following statements from Government bodies regarding live facial recognition:
(a) The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee report in July 2019, calling for a moratorium on all facial recognition technology until legislation has been put in place.
(b) The Information Commissioner’s Office, on 31 October 2019, publishing the first ever Information Commissioner’s Opinion stating there should be: “a statutory and binding code of practice issued by government.”
(c) In his response to the court judgment on South Wales Police's use of automated facial recognition technology, on 10 September 2019, the Biometrics Commissioner saying that, in his view, it was for ministers and Parliament to decide: “whether there should be a specific legal framework for the police (and others) to routinely deploy new biometrics including facial recognition but also voice recognition, gait analysis, iris analysis or other new biometric technologies as they emerge.”
(d) The Surveillance Camera Commissioner saying, in a statement issued on 11 September 2019 on the High Court judgment on the use of Automatic Facial Recognition technology by South Wales Police: “I would urge a degree of caution on the part of the police to regard the judgment as being a green light for the generic deployment of AFR.”

The Mayor: I have been clear that the Government should legislate to provide guidance which would clarify the use of Live Facial Recognition. In the absence of this, the MPS are clear that the legal framework currently in place, including the Bridges vs South Wales Police Judgement which found in favour of use of LFR by the police, permits the use of LFR. The legal mandate has been published here: https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/facial-recognition/live-facial-recognition/
The whole suite of documents published on the MPS website have been informed by discussion with the ICO, SCC and Biometrics Commissioner, in addition to the south Wales judicial review. The ICO acknowledges this here: https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/news-and-events/news-and-blogs/2020/01/ico-statement-in-response-to-an-announcement-made-by-the-met-police/ and the Surveillance Camera Commissioner’s self-assessment tool is available on the website.
The Equality Impact Assessment has taken into account the opinion of the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Government bodies and live facial recognition (2)

Siân Berry: What advice did the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) take from the Information Commissioner’s Office, the Biometrics Commissioner, or the Surveillance Camera Commissioner before deciding to deploy live facial recognition?

The Mayor: The MPS has been working closely with all the relevant Commissioners in advance of the deployment of LFR. This has included working with the ICO on the preparation of the Data and Privacy Impact Assessment and Equality Impact Assessment.

London Policing Ethics Panel recommendations on use of live facial recognition

Siân Berry: In the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) response to the London Policing Ethics Panel (LPEP) final report on live facial recognition (LFR), the MPS said it will publish its technical evaluation report on the LFR trials. When will this be published?

The Mayor: The report has been published: https://www.met.police.uk/SysSiteAssets/media/downloads/central/advice/met/facial-recognition/met-evaluation-report.pdf

London Policing Ethics Panel recommendations on use of live facial recognition (2)

Siân Berry: In the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) response to the London Policing Ethics Panel (LPEP) final report on live facial recognition (LFR), the MPS said it will publish a post-deployment review. When will this be published?

The Mayor: Information following deployments will be published on the MPS website. Information from the first deployment is now online.

Police use of live facial recognition (4)

Siân Berry: Facial recognition has been used at protests, demonstrations, and public events like Notting Hill Carnival. Will you make a commitment that facial recognition will not be used at public congregations and events like these again in the future?

The Mayor: Live Facial Recognition has never been used at protests or demonstrations in London. Deployment of Live Facial Recognition will be intelligence-led aimed at tackling serious crime, terrorism and to locate high-risk missing people. Senior officers in the MPS will determine when deployment is proportionate in line with the Standard Operating Procedure.

Police use of live facial recognition (2)

Siân Berry: The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) has stated that facial recognition technology will be used for serious crime. However, the MPS Standard Operating Procedures published on 24 January 2020 state that facial recognition watchlists can include anyone deemed “of interest” and people who are not actually wanted for any crime at all.
Could you clarify: (a) what constitutes serious crime (b) whether facial recognition technology will only be used on those wanted for serious crime within this definition, and (c) whether innocent people and those not wanted for serious crime will appear on facial recognition watchlists?

The Mayor: It is for the Metropolitan Police Service to determine the parameters of the operational use of Live Facial Recognition technology meeting the commitments made in their response to the London Policing Ethics Panel Report and in line with the Standard Operation Procedure. This Procedure is part of a suite of documents, including the response to the London Policing Ethics Panel report, the Equality Impact Assessment, Data and Privacy Impact Assessment and the legal mandate. These set out how LFR can be used. The use-case includes the potential for deployment to find high-risk missing people, for example, which would not linked to serious crime.

Police use of live facial recognition (3)

Siân Berry: Within the principle of ensuring each deployment is necessary and proportionate, could you clarify whether activists involved in non-violent direct action and environmental campaigning groups will be put on facial recognition watchlists?

The Mayor: The creation of watchlists is an operational matter for the Metropolitan Police Service. At present the plans are for LFR to be used to tackle serious crime, terrorism and locate high-risk missing people. The MPS have been clear that LFR will not be used to infringe on people’s lawful democratic rights. To do so would be unacceptable and would be contrary to the conditions set out in the London Policing Ethics Panel report which address the ethical use of LFR by the Met Police.

London Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls strategy (8)

Shaun Bailey: What specific work is the Victims’ Commissioner undertaking to fulfill the aims of the London Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls strategy?

The Mayor: The Victims’ Commissioner has undertaken significant work in this area, focussed around improving the service a victim receives and their journey through the criminal justice process, working with partners to address any issues identified. Specific work has focussed on a review of compliance with the Victims Code of Practice, which was completed and launched at the Victims’ Summit in March 2019. The Victims’ Commissioner is leading on driving forward the recommendations in this review with partners via the Victims Board, through a joint work plan.
The Victims’ Commissioner led on the London Rape Review, published in July 2019. The findings highlighted the worsening trend regarding the number of allegations that reach trial, and the incredibly low conviction rate. The review has developed recommendations and in addition a detailed plan of further research and work to be taken forward with partners.
The London Rape Review identified bail as a key area of risk for survivors of domestic abuse and the Victims’ Commissioner called on government to review bail. This review is now taking place and the Victims’ Commissioner will feed insight from the Rape Review into the government consultation.
The Victims’ Commissioner continues to lobby government around the forthcoming Domestic Abuse Bill and undertakes ongoing engagement and liaison with a wide range of partners, as well as victims and survivors, to identify and address issues that impact victims.

London Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls strategy (7)

Shaun Bailey: What specific work is the Victims’ Commissioner undertaking to ensure the safety of women at night?

The Mayor: Specific work around the safety of women at night has been led by the Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime (DMPC) and the Night Czar, developing the Women’s Safety at Night charter and supporting tool. Three Women's Night Safety Summits have been held (in July 2017, July 2018 and July 2019) and approximately 350 organisations are signed up to the charter to date.
The Victims’ Commissioner is not focussed specifically on the safety of women at night but she is supportive of the work and is in regular communication on this issue with both the DMPC and the Night Czar.

Allocation of Additional Police Officers for 2020-2021 by Borough

Caroline Pidgeon: Can you provide a breakdown of the additional police officers the Met will receive in the 2020-2021 financial year by the borough they will be based in?

The Mayor: To date, the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) has only been allocated 1,369 additional officers from the Government. As I have made clear the MPS needs at least 6,000 of the Governments additional officers and 1,369 is not nearly enough.
Of the 1,369, the MPS aims to recruit 500 officers by end of March 2020 with the remaining 869 being in post by September 2020. The deployment of these new officers is an operational decision for the MPS.
In this year’s budget, I have invested £100.6m to tackle violent crime. Some of this investment will be used to bring forward the recruitment of a further 600 police officers in 20/21. This is on top of the 1,300 already being funded from City Hall

High-performance cars crimes

Tony Devenish: Why do the police seemingly ignore reports of high-performance cars speeding and making excessive noise in Kensington and Chelsea?

The Mayor: This is primarily an issue of noise and therefore more of an issue for the Local Authority. Nonetheless, the MPS is aware of the nuisance the problem causes for residents and conducts regular operations to try and deal with the problem at ward level using legislation from the Road Traffic Act. An operation on 6 February, for example, saw a Lamborghini seized for having no insurance.

Disabled Officer numbers

Unmesh Desai: Please provide the total MPS Police officer (FTE) percentage breakdown of Disabled officers to total officers in December of each of the following years: 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019.

The Mayor: Please see the table below which shows Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) officer totals and the number and percentage of self-declared officers with a disability.
Note that declaration is not mandatory and the figures may not demonstrate the full picture.
Date / Year
Total Officers
Self Declared Disability
% Self Declared Disability
Dec 2019
30,976.98
526.81
1.70%
Dec 2018
29,692.02
534.53
1.80%
Dec 2017
30,046.35
611.66
2.04%
Dec 2016
31,075.83
633.84
2.04%
Dec 2015
31,612.25
626.56
1.98%
Dec 2014
31,299.84
609.27
1.95%
Dec 2013
30,085.12
577.24
1.92%
Dec 2012
30,810.66
566.88
1.84%
Dec 2011
31,427.12
557.15
1.77%
Dec 2010
32,502.66
564.91
1.74%

Bringing LFB course design in house

Andrew Dismore: What cost do you estimate will be incurred by bringing course design for LBF training in house?

The Mayor: The cost of bringing course design in-house is estimated to be £556k per annum. This would be a staff unit cost only.

London Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls strategy (4)

Shaun Bailey: What progress has been made on achieving accreditation from the UN, as part of the UN Women’s initiative ‘Safe Cities and Safe Public Spaces’, as stated in the London Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls strategy?

The Mayor: I am pleased to report that accreditation was achieved at the end of 2018, since then MOPAC has worked with partners to develop a scoping report and recommendations. Plans are being progressed around publicising the report, which will take place in the coming weeks.

London Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls strategy (3)

Shaun Bailey: What work have you done with external stakeholders, including London boroughs and national Government, to achieve the aims within the London Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls strategy by 2021?

The Mayor: An extensive amount of work has been undertaken with a wide range of sectors including statutory and voluntary stakeholders, through the London Crime Reduction Board, London Criminal Justice Board, VAWG Board and other forums with representation from London Councils, London boroughs, Ministry of Justice, Home Office, CPS, NPS, MPS and others. These forums are held regularly and are one of the mechanisms through which we raise the delivery of the London Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls strategy. Outside of these forums, officers from my Office for Policing and Crime meet with representatives from national and local government agencies, voluntary VAWG services and victims/survivors to progress the aims of the VAWG strategy and ensure delivery outcomes are met.

The Met’s Use of Facial Recognition Technology (1)

Caroline Pidgeon: There are many concerns about the use of facial recognition technology. Please clarify that ‘people of interest’ will be included on Live Facial Recognition (LFR) ‘watchlists’ as well as those wanted for serious crimes? Please provide clear information on how these ‘watchlists’ will be compiled and the specific criteria for someone to be included on such a list, above and beyond the vague information currently published on this?

The Mayor: The LFR Guidance Document covers the issues that need to be considered when compiling a watchlist, including how we address perceived disproportionality. The Live Facial Recognition Standard Operating Procedure (https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/facial-recognition/live-facial-recognition/) sets out how watchlists are to be generated and how they are to be used.

The Met’s Use of Facial Recognition Technology (3)

Caroline Pidgeon: The only independent report conducted into the Met’s 2019 trial of live facial recognition technology (LFR), by Professor Peter Fussey and Dr Daragh Murray of the University of Essex’s Human Rights Centre, concluded that the technology was only accurate on 19% of occasions and had severe operational shortcomings that would be unlikely to hold up in court. Considering that the Met is now rolling this out as an operational tool, not as a trial, are you confident that all the operational failings and concerns outlined in the report referenced above have been resolved and mitigated?

The Mayor: The Metropolitan Police Service have published their legal mandate (https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/facial-recognition/live-facial-recognition/) which they believe supports the operational use of Live Facial Recognition, including drawing on the Bridges vs South Wales Police Judgement which found in favour of use of LFR by the police. Other elements of the Essex Report focused on Data Protection Impact Assessments and the Equality Impact Assessment. These have been substantially rewritten by the MPS and published online.
The MPS disagree with many of the findings in the report, including Professor Fussey’s interpretation of the accuracy figures. The Met has published its own review of the trials in consultation with the National Physical Laboratory. This is available online.

The Met’s Use of Facial Recognition Technology (2)

Caroline Pidgeon: You have made clear you want the government to introduce a national legal framework for police forces using facial recognition technology. Are you comfortable with the Met using this technology without such a framework in place?

The Mayor: I have been clear that the Government should legislate to provide guidance which would clarify the use of Live Facial Recognition. In the absence of this, the MPS are clear that the legal framework currently in place, including the Bridges vs South Wales Police Judgement which found in favour of use of LFR by the police, permits the use of LFR. The legal mandate has been published here: https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/facial-recognition/live-facial-recognition/

Catalytic Converter Thefts

Leonie Cooper: Please can you provide the number of catalytic converter thefts that took place in London in December 2019?

The Mayor: I can confirm that 1275 catalytic converter thefts took place in London in December 2019.
I am aware that there has been a sharp increase in the theft of catalytic converters in London in recent months. I wrote to Mike Hawes, Chief Executive of the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) in December last year, impressing upon him the importance of the UK motor industry taking steps to help prevent and deter the theft of catalytic converters by enhancing the security features of new vehicles, including making component parts easier to trace. I also stressed the importance of a partnership approach with the police to tackle the problem.

Police Patrols

Joanne McCartney: What steps are you taking to increase the amount of police patrols in crime hotspots?

The Mayor: The MPS uses intelligence and analysis to identify hotspot areas and maximise the efficiency of officer deployment. This approach has been taken for a number of priority areas including robbery. For example, the MPS have identified the 20 top wards for personal robbery and times of peaking offending. Using this information, tactics such as plain clothes, uniformed officers, Q-cars and targeted crime prevention messaging have been deployed. These tactics, coupled with others, have been successful in increasing robbery arrest rates and intelligence gathering, as well as improving victim safety.

Police Driving Instructors (1)

Caroline Pidgeon: Please provide the number of agency workers used by the Met as driving instructors in 2019 and to date in 2020, broken down by month.

The Mayor: The number of agency workers engaged as driving instructors is set out in the table below:
Month / Year
Number of Agency Workers engaged as Driving Instructors
Jan 2019
4
Feb 2019
5
March 2019
5
April 2019
4
May 2019
5
June 2019
4
July 2019
4
August 2019
4
September 2019
4
October 2019
4
November 2019
3
December 2019
3
January 2020
3
February 2020
3

Alteration notices

Andrew Dismore: Why have no alteration notices been issued by LFB since March 2011?

The Mayor: There have been three alterations notices served by London Fire Brigade (LFB) since 2011 and there are notices in place for all London Underground sub-surface stations. Alteration notices require the person they are served upon to notify LFB of any changes the Responsible Person intends to make to premises, if this may adversely impact on fire safety. Alteration notices are one of a number of tools available to Fire and Rescue Services (FRS) in carrying out their regulatory role and their use is discretionary for each FRS. Historically, there have been limited use of alterations notices by LFB, with the focus instead being on education, engagement and a proactive inspection regime. Following the HMICFRS report, which specifically commented on the use of alteration notices in London, LFB Fire Safety is reconsidering where wider use of alteration notices may be beneficial in supporting fire safety in the built environment.

CCTV

Tony Devenish: Please can you provide the number of crime fighting CCTV cameras in each of these boroughs, Kensington and Chelsea, Hammersmith and Fulham, and Westminster?

The Mayor: The majority of CCTV is owned and operated by Local Authorities and they are responsible for the placement and monitoring of CCTV. The Met is unable to provide the data requested broken down by Borough because to do so might enable criminals to identify the overall level of CCTV in a specific area. This may assist criminal decision making and could adversely affect public safety.
CCTV plays an important role in helping prevent crime and keeping Londoners safe and my Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) commissioned a technical assessment to help boroughs plan for their future use of CCTV and to assist all CCTV operators work together to protect Londoners.
I continue to have serious concerns about the delay in delivering the Westminster CCTV project. I am disappointed that progress remains slow and that following the decision by Westminster City Council Cabinet to decommission and remove a significant number of cameras in June 2016, gaps still exist in key hotspots in Westminster where levels of personal robbery offending remain high. The Metropolitan Police is engaging with Westminster Council to move the project forward, however these efforts have been hampered by the need to secure agreement and cooperation from Westminster Council and its contractors.

Improving building safety audits

Andrew Dismore: What is the LFB doing to a) increase uptake of the shortened audit process for building safety and b) implement the trialled project of firefighters doing low risk audits?

The Mayor: London Fire Brigade (LFB) already has a ‘short audit’ capability built into the existing electronic audit forms used during inspections. All LFB audits start as a ‘short audit’ and the inspection process is only extended if fire safety failures are evident in the building or the management arrangements. This approach is in alignment with the 2015 national CFOA Guidance on the audit and inspection principles. The only difference is that LFB uses this single expandable electronic ‘form’ rather than two separate and discrete processes, and therefore LFB does not report on these separately to the Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government. It is expected that the training for fire station crews to undertake fire safety checks will start in June 2020 and take 24 months to complete.

The Met’s Use of Facial Recognition (5)

Caroline Pidgeon: Are you comfortable with the Met using Facial Recognition Technology despite both the Surveillance Camera Commissioner and the Biometrics Commissioner calling for a moratorium on the use of Facial Recognition Technology until a detailed review can be undertaken?

The Mayor: I have been clear that the Government should legislate to provide guidance which would clarify the use of Live Facial Recognition. In the absence of this, the MPS are clear that the legal framework currently in place, including the Bridges vs South Wales Police Judgement which found in favour of use of LFR by the police, permits the use of LFR. The legal mandate has been published here: https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/facial-recognition/live-facial-recognition/

The Met’s Use of Facial Recognition Technology (4)

Caroline Pidgeon: I do not feel simply handing out leaflets to people once their biometric data is already captured is sufficient in terms of ‘engagement’ when it comes to the use of Facial Recognition Technology. What further community engagement will the Met be undertaking as part of the use of Facial Recognition Technology?

The Mayor: In addition to leaflets and signage on the ground when Live Facial Recognition is used, the MPS will notify the public through social and mainstream media. A programme of local community engagement working with Independent Advisory Groups and other partners is taking place in advance of each deployment.